There may be some good reasons why it doesn’t make sense to change the metallic composition of the nickel and penny, but they haven’t yet been elucidated by anyone in Washington yet.

The House passed a bill Thursday that would authorize the U.S. Mint to “prescribe” a new recipe for the country’s two least valuable coins — which, thanks to rising commodity prices, now cost 7.7 cents and 1.26 cents, respectively, to manufacture.

This is a good idea: If steel were used instead of copper, nickel and zinc, the coins would once again cost less to make than they’re worth, and the government wouldn’t lose money on them. In fact, if the bill passed by the House became law, it would save the government an estimated $1 billion over the next decade. Is any better reason needed to pass it?

Actually, the government could go one better by eliminating the penny altogether. Why bother with a coin that is essentially so worthless that it can buy nothing? The penny’s only use nowadays seems to be in paying off odd cents created by sales tax. If all transactions were rounded appropriately up or down, it would not only save the government hundreds of millions of dollars, it would remove a huge headache for consumers.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration opposes this legislation on technical grounds — it doesn’t agree with Congress’ interpretation of the Constitution that it has the right to “coin money and regulate the value thereof.” OK, so let the administration take the action on its own.